4 ms·
> Humans are lazy and greedy and stupid. But that applies to everything, and nuclear is responsible for fewer deaths per TWh of power generated than anything yo
by Tade0 7y ago
> Humans are lazy and greedy and stupid. But that applies to everything, and nuclear is responsible for fewer deaths per TWh of power generated than anything you're proposing as a "dirty" alternative.
There may be fewer deaths, but it's the only energy source to create effectively permanent no-go zones.
- dsfyu404ed 7y agoIn areas with heavy coal mining activity the water and the soil is poisoned from erosion and runoff and people that live in these places come in enough contact with the toxins (mostly heavy metals) that they develop medical problems later in life. In practice the effect is about the same that you'd get if you lived in a radioactive area.
- cycomanic 7y agoThis is a non argument. Nobody is seriously proposing coal as an alternative to nuclear. Sure in some countries (e.g. Germany) they phased out nuclear before coal, but there are very different reasons for this, for example they are favoring brown over black coal. That is for different reasons though, largely the political lobby and associated jobs in economically weak regions (note I'm not saying this is right). However, nobody is proposing coal as a long term solution. Yes one might make the argument that nuclear is safer than coal (however that argument is by no means as clear cut as you make it out too be), but the competition are renewables and neither nuclear or coal come close.
- simloo 7y agoNot the parent, but if you look at what's currently replacing nuclear power world-wide it seems to be gas. Gas extraction is also not very environmentally friendly and releases a lot of nasty toxins into the air and surrounding areas, just not as much as coal mining does. I think the point still stands.
- asjw 7y agoNot the only one People are also highly irrational, they'll live where water is contaminated but fear 5G wireless https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster
- Tade0 7y agoThat was a chemical plant, not a power plant.
- chinesempire 7y agoThe difference being? Nuclear power plants aren't special in being a threat to human safety if they malfunction, that's what I got from the comment.